https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359311 The ITAT dismissed the revenue's appeals and one of the assessee's appeals, while allowing the other assessee's appeal for statistical purposes. The judgment emphasized the indefinite carry forward of unabsorbed depreciation post-amendment, validated the reopening of assessments under judicial directions, upheld the classification of Agmark charges as capital expenditure, and mandated a fresh review of the rectification claim. en-us Tue, 20 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Apr 2018 08:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359311 The ITAT dismissed the revenue's appeals and one of the assessee's appeals, while allowing the other assessee's appeal for statistical purposes. The judgment emphasized the indefinite carry forward of unabsorbed depreciation post-amendment, validated the reopening of assessments under judicial directions, upheld the classification of Agmark charges as capital expenditure, and mandated a fresh review of the rectification claim. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 20 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359311